On Apr 15, 2009, at 11:28 AM, Lennart Regebro wrote: > Here are a list of things I have seen that you may mean when you say > "Zope 3". I'm sure I missed several: > > 1. Whatever is included in the Zope 3 tgz that you download. > > 2. All the packages included in the Zope 3 KGS. (Should be the same as > 1, if I understand correctly.) > > 3. 1 or 2 minus the ZMI. > > 4. The zope.app.publication publisher. > > 5. A loose set of packages starting with zope.*, zc.* and z3c.* > > 6. A strictly defined (by the Zope Toolkit KGS) set of packages > starting with zope.*, zc.* and z3c.* that is central and common to > Zope 3 in the sense of 1 or 2, and also Grok and Zope 2. > > 7. Technologies that you use when you develop with the packages in 5 > and 6. > > > I propose that the name Zope 3 applies *only* to 1 and 2. If future > versions of 1 or 2 gets released without the ZMI (as discussed in > other threads), then of course 1, 2 and 3 is the same. > > Opinions?
I've been away on a vacation of sorts, and find myself happy to not have been around for this firestorm. A few observations. - I very much agree with Lennart's observation that the definition of "Zope 3" is not clear. - It may have been a mistake to use the name "Zope 3", but it is done now, and done a *long* time ago. Trying to outright kill it feels like thrashing. - Moreover, because *we* don't know what "Zope 3" means, I'm afraid users outside viewers are going to easily misinterpret any kind of message framed in the terms of "Zope 3's death" or "abandonment" or whatever. How are they supposed to know what it means? I was concerned about Tim Hoffman's statement in the long "who wants to maintain..." thread: "It seems from all the discussion of late that we might of chosen a architectural dead end (though I don't think so)." We're not declaring the Zope 3 libraries (toolkit, whatever, bah) a dead end; far from it. But how easy it is to make a sound bite from this discussion into basically that message? "Zope 3: architectural dead end." I don't care for that, myself, nor do I find it accurate. This message seems like a reasonable start to me: "Zope 3 has become focused on supporting frameworks and applications, rather than trying to be one itself. It is now called the Zope Toolkit. Parts of it are used by Zope 2, Plone, Grok, Repoze.bfg, and by many other different applications and frameworks." That message implies two things to me. First, to start with, this is just a rename. Zope 3, as defined by the KGS, becomes the Zope Toolkit. Second, the "Zope Toolkit" is about supporting other frameworks. That means that it is reasonable to expect that the packages and the parts of packages that were about the ZMI will quite possibly die a typical open source death of not enough people caring anymore. I don't think trying to guess which parts or packages will die is a particularly useful exercise. The community will support what the community supports...as usual. This is open source. You're gambling that enough other people will be there with you to make it worthwhile, and you may be required to step up with money or talent or energy to make that happen. So, again, in sum, I propose that this discussion should simply be reduced to a rename to start with: Zope 3, as defined by the KGS -> Zope Toolkit. The software switch that this name change implies has started quite some time ago, with the eggification, and will continue in its natural and usual open-source course. Gary _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )